Towards the Raychaudhuri equation beyond general relativity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In general relativity, gravity is universally attractive, a feature embodied by the Raychaudhuri equation which requires that the expansion of a congruence of geodesics is always non-increasing, as long as matter obeys the strong or weak energy conditions. This behavior of geodesics is an important ingredient in general proofs of singularity theorems, which show that many spacetimes are singular in the sense of being geodesically incomplete and suggest that general relativity is itself incomplete. It is possible that alternative theories of gravity, which reduce to general relativity in some limit, can resolve these singularities, so it is of interest to consider how the behavior of geodesics is modified in these frameworks. We compute the leading corrections to the Raychaudhuri equation for the expansion due to models in string theory, braneworld gravity, $f(R)$ theories, and loop quantum cosmology, for cosmological and black hole backgrounds, and show that while in most cases geodesic convergence is reinforced, in a few cases terms representing repulsion arise, weakening geodesic convergence and thereby the conclusions of the singularity theorems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".